Posted!

Join the Conversation

Lance Armstrong wins endorsement lawsuit

Brent Schrotenboer, USA TODAY Sports 6:05 p.m. EST February 26, 2014

1999: Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong won the race after overcoming testicular cancer. He would go on to win seven consecutive Tour de France titles, but in 2012 was stripped of the titles and banned for life from competing after accusations of doping.(Photo: 1999 photo by Toby Talbot, AP)

A Los Angeles judge has dismissed another fraud lawsuit against Lance Armstrong, ruling that the disgraced cyclist engaged in mere "puffery" and not illegal false advertising when he claimed that FRS energy products were his secret weapon for success.

Armstrong was sued last year by a group of FRS consumers who sought more than $5 million from FRS and Armstrong for misleading them into buying their products, which include energy drinks. Armstrong claimed the products were his "secret weapon" when in fact doping was his real secret weapon, according to their suit. If they had known the truth about his doping, the plaintiffs argued they wouldn't have bought FRS products.

But federal judge Beverly Reid O'Connell disagreed with their argument.

"The court finds that defendants' statements about a `secret weapon' constitute non-actionable puffery," she wrote in her ruling.

Puffery is a legal concept that relates to advertising, a notion that companies can make exaggerated or boastful subjective claims about their products and not be held liable for literal definitions about them.

Armstrong acted as a spokesman and part owner of FRS, helping the company grow five-fold at the height of his fame, the suit states. But after doping evidence mounted against him in 2012, the company parted ways with him along with several others. In January 2013, after several years of denials, he finally confessed to doping in an interview with Oprah Winfrey. The suit against FRS was filed against Armstrong a month later.

Armstrong attorney Zia Modabber said the FRS case was "opportunistic" and an example of "kicking a guy when he's down."

It was one of five lawsuits filed against him after his confession. Of those five, two remain: a suit filed by the federal government on behalf of the U.S. Postal Service and a suit by a SCA Promotions, a Texas sports insurance company that seeks to recover bonuses it paid for Armstrong's victories in the Tour de France from 2002-04.

Armstrong suffered a setback in the SCA case Tuesday when a Texas judge ruled against his request to block the case. SCA is seeking forfeiture of the prize money and sanctions against Armstrong, who falsely denied doping under oath during a previous lawsuit against SCA in 2005-06.

In that previous case, Armstrong had sued SCA after the company withheld his Tour de France bonus on the basis that he might have cheated to win the race. After Armstrong's false denial under oath, SCA paid Armstrong and Tailwind a $7.5 million settlement. As part of that settlement, SCA agreed that it could not reopen the case. But after learning that he lied, SCA wants Armstrong punished for it - and its money back.

Armstrong's attorneys say the previous settlement is binding and the case should not be allowed to be reopened. A Texas district judge sided with SCA on Tuesday, allowing the case to be heard by the same arbitration panel that handled the case in 2005-06.

"We look forward to the arbitration hearing where we will finally get a chance to hold Mr. Armstrong accountable for his outrageous conduct and outright perjury," Jeffrey Tillotson, an attorney for SCA, said in a statement to USA TODAY Sports. "Judgment day is coming and this time it won't be from the comfort of a couch with Oprah. Instead, he will be facing the same arbitration panel that he previously looked straight in the eye and, while under oath, lied in relentless fashion."

Other suits against Armstrong have had mixed results. Last year, a different federal judge dismissed a suit brought by readers of Armstrong's books. The judge ruled that the lies in Armstrong's books were protected by the First Amendment.

In another suit, Armstrong reached an undisclosed settlement with Acceptance Insurance, another insurance company that paid for his Tour de France bonuses from 1999 to 2001. The Sunday Times of London also reached a settlement with Armstrong last year in a fraud suit that was initiated before his confession.

In the FRS case, the judge ruled the plaintiffs could amend their case if they wished, though that is considered unlikely.

Armstrong was stripped of his seven titles in the Tour de France in 2012.

"Plaintiffs suggest that, because defendant Armstrong was stripped of his titles after defendant FRS's advertisements were published, the victories never occurred," the judge in the FRS case ruled. "The fact that defendant Armstrong knew he used illegal methods to win the Tour de France, does not negate his titles."